No, this is not a useful, not a practical idea.

The presentation of text on computer screens has a negative impact on surface legibility [1]. As a consequence, reading on a computer screen is about 20% slower than reading on paper [2]. In order to present a satisfactory level of legibility, computer presentation requires the use of a greater contrast, less information density and bigger characters [3]. Currently, few Web sites put these principles into practice. Screen legibility can also be improved through the use of high definition screens [4], but for most users this technology is still not available.

Visualization of information is another source of difference between print and computer presentation. Print technologies allow the use of large display areas (e.g., newspaper pages, posters), and a straightforward perception of text extension and content (e.g., stacks of books and papers on a desk). With computer presentation, the display area is bound by the physical size of the computer screen. Text resources are represented by symbols, e.g., icons in a file folder or links in a hypertext menu. When browsing through printed materials, contents can be easily scanned; when browsing a hypertext, the user has to select links in order to explore the contents. Additional difficulties are the need to perform mouse clicks in order to go from one page to another, and the need to use the scroll bar while reading. One study has shown that these two conditions (paging and scrolling), when combined, increase(!) reading time and decrease memory for information, although no significant differences were found for either device used in isolation [5].

Hypertext links also allow for the building of nonlinear text structures. While pages in a printed text are organized according to a linear pattern (i.e., numbered series), in hypertext pages can be organized as a nonlinear network. Even though nonlinearity has sometimes been praised as a means to free the reader from the rigid organization of printed materials [6], excessive nonlinearity is known to cause disorientation and cognitive overload [7]. Some authors argue that linearity is not a technological "constraint" of printed materials, but a way to help readers follow the author's reasoning and extract main ideas from a text [8]. There is a "need" for some linearity, which comes with the need to understand the concepts underlying the linguistic message [9]. As Beaugrande [10] writes, linear principles are inscribed in language itself.! These principles, such as pacing, look-back and lookahead, merging and listing help the user control the several levels of complexity in a text, and play an important role in text interpretation. A recent study by Eveland and Dunwoody [11] has shown that disorientation can be reduced by using print "cues" in hypertext, such as page numbers and summaries. In any case, reducing nonlinearity helps improve hypertext legibility.

1. Dillon, A. (1994) Designing Usable Electronic Text: Ergonomics Aspects of Human
Information Usage. London: Taylor and Francis

2. NIELSEN, J. (2000). Designing Web Usability. Indianapolis : New Riders Publishing.

3. CARO, S. & BÉTRANCOURT, M. (1998). Ergonomie des documents techniques informatisés :
expériences et recommendations sur l'utilisation des organisateurs para-linguistiques. In :
TRICOT, A. & ROUET, J.-F. (orgs), Les hypermédias : approches cognitives et ergonomiques.
Paris : Hermès.

4. Gould, J.D., Alfaro, L., Finn, R., Haupt, B., Minuto, A. (1987) - Reading from CRT
displays can be as fast as reading from paper. Human Factors, 26, 497-517.

5. Van OOSTENDORP, H. & van NIMWEGEN, C. (1998). Locating Information in an Online
Newspaper. Journal of Computer Mediated Communication, 4 (1). Available from WWW. URL
:http ://www.ascusc.org/jcmc/vol4/issue1/oostendorp.html. [20/02/01]

6. Bernstein, M., Bolter, J. D., Joyce, M., & Mylonas, E. (1991). Architectures for Volatile
Hypertext. In R. Furuta & D. Stotts (Eds.), Proceedings of the Third ACM Conference on
Hypertext (pp. 243-260). New York, NY: ACM Press.

7. Gordon, S., Gustavel, J., Moore, J. & Hankey, J. (1988). The effect of hypertext on reader
knowledge representation. Proceedings of the 32nd Annual Meeting of the Human Factors
Society (296-300). Santa Monica, CA: Human Factors Society.

8. CHARNEY, D. (1991). The Impact of Hypertext on Processes of Reading and Writing. Mimeo.
(mimeo) [To appear in : HILLIGOSS, S., SELFE, C. (eds). Literacy and Computers, New York :
MLA.]

9. EVELAND, W. P. & DUNWOODY, S. (1998) Users and navigation patterns of a science World
Wide Web site for the public. Public Understanding of Science, 7 (4), 285-311.

10. BEAUGRANDE, R. DE (1997). New Foundations for a science of text and discourse
: cognition, communication and the Freedom of Acess to Knowledge and Society. New Jersey :
Ablex Publishing Corporation.

11. EVELAND, W. P. & DUNWOODY, S. (2001). User control and Structural Isomorphism or
Disorientation and Cognitive Load? Learning from the Web versus Print. Communication
Research, 28(1), feb/2001, p. 48-78.